Find a Lawyer

MIR MUHAMMAD ASLAM versus BILQEES BEGUM

According to the essence of the Sections 15 and 22 Contract Act (DC of 1872), Sections 55 and 65 of the Special Performance Unenforceable Shared Property Agreement, the applicable suit land was owned by three persons and only of these were the defendants. Was. The sale amount for all the land with the plaintiff was received by the defendant and the contract was to be completed within a stipulated time the plaintiff sued on the basis that the defendant had failed to perform part of his contract. And the plaintiff's transfer of the case was denied at the time the agreement was summarized and the plaintiff failed to complete the work within the stipulated time, the trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff. Was only decided on the extent of the land owned by the defendant, by which the claimant granted the right of ownership Had failed to prove. Because the trial court did not express its consent to relinquish claims for further performance or compensation, some portion of the suit was not granted to the parties only with the immediate possession of a sale. The sole and unencumbered deal was considered and it was clearly stated that part of the essence of the contract should be enforced separately. For the remainder of the agreement, the parties independently entered into a contract with a clear intention that the agreement be executed within six months and stated a specific date for the purpose that the defendants successfully proved. That they are not obligated to perform their part of the contract. Balance sale price at the time specified by the claimant immigration advocates phone number from Chilas lawyer